-
Now things look even worse, 15 grafts/cm2 and theres was 100cm2 bald spot,suggests many grafts didn't grow. -
-
-
You said 300 at best, I'm telling you straight that it's nowhere near 300. I'm not referring to anything else.I said AT BEST, Gaz
Also that red spot that I painted is really bigger than a square cm. Just making my point, that you need AT BEST (but more probably even less) than 1800 FUE grafts to get your result. Just my point that the results don't look like regrowth at all to me. You'd have depleted your donor, like it is now. And you'd have some basic coverage, like you have now. Just looks like a normal FUE result to me.Leave a comment:
-
If your point is that some FUE can really butcher up your donor and leave huge scars: I totally agree. That's why I think HST is still the best we have. But there's just no evidence at all of any regrowth, quite the contrary in fact. All evidence points us to none to very little regrowth.Just done.
Just done. Yeah, and?
I can see an even distribution of hair onto a former completely slick bald area; that indicates, that practically everything they implanted so far - produced finally healthy terminal hair.
Try to find all gc's BEFORE photos and feel free to count all the hairs you can see now - with the help of gc's AFTER photos.
Concerning the recipient area result/yield - not at all. Of course it's also possible with normal FUE - basically.
Concerning the look of the donor area thereafter, and THAT'S the point - feel free to compare:
gc's donor area after around 5000 HST grafts:
James Bald's donor area after ???? FUE grafts:
By the way: Could you please try to guestimate the size of James Bald's recipient area and the amount of hair per cm2? Thanks in advance ...Leave a comment:
-
I said AT BEST, Gaz Also that red spot that I painted is really bigger than a square cm. Just making my point, that you need AT BEST (but more probably even less) than 1800 FUE grafts to get your result. Just my point that the results don't look like regrowth at all to me. You'd have depleted your donor, like it is now. And you'd have some basic coverage, like you have now. Just looks like a normal FUE result to me.
Leave a comment:
-
I'll tell you how I know, because the hair piece I wore was 10cm diameter and the hair piece slightly covers the areas with hair.
Admittedly they have put about 700 in the front area which wasn't in the original 100cm2 area. I suppose a few hundred have been lost on the edges, because I asked them to increase the density on the edges to give the appearance of a more natural smooth result, hopefully you follow me there with that.
Also it's worth pointing out that in HST 4, they didn't put any grafts at all in the middle back area. They did the front area, near forelock, about 2 inches back from forelock, all the edges, the front (hairline area) and the also concentrated on the very top-back where there was virtually no hair.
So the area with that Red square 'i think' has only had one pass, which would have been HST 3. You can probably verify from an after HST 4 photo where the grafts were implanted, I'll have to check and see if I have one showing it.Leave a comment:
-
-
-
300cm2..no way.. average NW6 is 200-250 cm2. he was nowhere near NW6.Think Thane.
IMO his bald area was 10cm x 10cm in the worst case scenario, that's 100cm2 and he should have 4500 FUs growing in this area...that's 45 grafts per cm2...Leave a comment:
-
Reallistically I think he has slightly less than 15g/cm2. Really, try marking what you think is a cm2 on different spots. Reallically, I'd say he has about 15 *hairs*/cm2. I'd also guestimate his recipient to be about 300 cm at best. So that's at best about 4500 hairs in recipient. At 2.5 hairs/grafts (like with a FUE), that would amount to a total of 1800 grafts. So, an 1800 graft FUE would have given the same result.
If anybody disagrees with me, then prove me wrong: do mark a few times a spot on his his scalp that you think is a square cm. Count the hairs. Count an average. And please prove me wrong. I think it's impossible.Leave a comment:
-
I am looking at the photo above and it looks like there cant be 50 grafts /cm2.
But I thought Hasci implants 30-35 grafts per cm2 on slick bald scalp and that was the case with GC and last procedure was to thicken it up and bring it to 50. Maybe thats wrong.
Anyway,if he has 15 g/cm2 then theres no way GC has 4 000 - 5000 grafts in recipient.Leave a comment:
-
Just done.
Just done. Yeah, and?
I can see an even distribution of hair onto a former completely slick bald area; that indicates, that practically everything they implanted so far - produced finally healthy terminal hair.
Try to find all gc's BEFORE photos and feel free to count all the hairs you can see now - with the help of gc's AFTER photos.
Concerning the recipient area result/yield - not at all. Of course it's also possible with normal FUE - basically.
Concerning the look of the donor area thereafter, and THAT'S the point - feel free to compare:
gc's donor area after around 5000 HST grafts:
James Bald's donor area after ???? FUE grafts:
By the way: Could you please try to guestimate the size of James Bald's recipient area and the amount of hair per cm2? Thanks in advance ...Leave a comment:
-
And I agree with Didi that you have to ask yourself if you want to continue from here on Gaz. The human mind is trained to see things that are unnatural. If your donor becomes really thin, that will look very unnatural and thus weird. You now have some coverage on top, enough to make it look ok. I don't know if it would be a good idea to add more to your recipient at the expense of creating an unnatural donor look.
If I were you, I'd go one last time, for a small surgery, just to put some hair into the scars and then have a party to celebrate the end result
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: